March. 1689 The DANGER of A COMPREHENSION.  
MANY Reasons lead me to oppose a Comprehension, and the first of them is the very reason I pereive which others have given for it, That it fortifies the Church of England against Dissenters; for since our Fear was of Popery, to translate it so early against Protestants of other Communions, is to tell them, that having rid ourselves of Papists, we are making New Levies against them, and that we only halt a while to recruit our Numbers, and when in a posture to attack them, they shall not fail to feel the weight of our Power and Comprehension. By this means, of very good Friends against Popery, we shall grow Parties and Enemies; and if this be not to be most carefully avoided in our present Condition, I am mistaken both in my Religion and Politics.  
II. But Secondly, What need is there of a Comprehension, which carries in it a Variation of the Old and Settled Methods of the Church, only to let in so many Men to Church Benefices; for when all is done, that must be the Mark they aim at, that press it on the side of the Presbiterian, since an Act of Indulgence would else answer that Gentleman as well: And if it were a Conscientious Desire on the other side to enlarge the Church, it would become a Duty with her to fling off all the rest that others scruple, upon as good grounds, and which cannot be said to be Essential to Faith or Worship, and so make but one Work of it for this Age. Since Conscience therefore does not seem to be the Ground of this Comprehension on either side, it must needs have but an ill bottom to stand upon.  
III. We are not, nor cannot be assured, That the alteration this brings to the Church of England will stop here; for more Knowledge or Delusion prevailing among themselves or others, will call for the use of the same Prudence; and so she can never be certain and stable, but subject to change with the Postures and Motions of Opinion or State.  
iv It has something in it of Irreverence and Levity. Two Churches to bargain about Faith and Worship, to take or leave, add or diminish, and both Parties to show themselves stiff or careless for the same things, as Humour or Interest govern them, which in Men pretending to Religion, cannot fail to scandalise those that are not so Believing or Zealous as they ought to be.  
V I consider the very differing Temper of the Two Parties, whether it flow from Succession of Education given by the Authors or Founders of them, or the Influence of their Principles, or that one has been used to Ease and Dominion, and the other to want the first and feel the last, or from all of them; but 'tis certain, there is a Latitude and an Hospitality, a Passion and Reverence to Majesty, almost to an Implicit Obedience, in the Church of England, and in the Presbiterian Communion, a Stiffness, a Meddling, a Censoriousness, not sparing their Superiors; naturally indeed inclined to Kings, but loving them as Boys do their Tops, to whip them. And it is this Disposition that has ever made that Society troublesome both to Church and State. Now as Men that are not of a Temper live best with one another at some Distance, so the Church of England will be less perplexed, and the Presbiterian less controlled in an Act of Indulgence than in one of Comprehension.  
VI If the Comprehension be not stated upon an Unity of Practice, it can never endure. For look how many different Practices there are, so many Parties in a short time there will be; and such a Comprehension can only serve to break and dissolve, instead of strengthening, the present Church. Common Sense teaches us, That one Enemy within doors is stronger than Ten without doors; and such every person comprehended must render himself after a while, upon a differing Practice from the Old Standards of the Communion. If I saw more Piety and Charity in both Parties than formerly, I would forbid myself this liberty; but when I find Passions as strong, and Interest as prevalent on each side as ever, I must beg their pardon, if I sav I cannot think their Notion of a Comprehension reasonable.  
Lastly, No body has ever yet succeeded upon this Design. It has been endeavoured by great Men of several Persuasions at several times, as Cassander, Cajetan, Erasmus, Melancthon, Phlugius, Grotius, Salmasius, Dury, and others, as well between Papists and Protestants, as Lutherans and Calvinists, but ever to no purpose: and though the Ministers should come in, their People would, in all probability, fall to their share that are left out by this Act of Comprehension. Wherefore I conclude, It is an Attempt that shows, in some men, more of Fancy than Judgement, and Interest than Religion; and that Iron and Clay will as soon cement, as our Episcopacy and Presbytery, will or can join to constitute one National Church in England.